Justin

Right! Since Canon and Nikon refuse to implement in-camera IS, and tout the "vastly superior" in-lens version, you really have to cry foul when they leave it out of any lens design, save maybe the widest of angles.

.............. First non-L prime in quite some time and with IS...................

Would that be for video purposes?Or to make it more easy for HDR (bracketing) indoor and not using mono/tri-pod?

Why IS on a 24mm?

handheld night pics of still objects (architecture, landscape, whatever).4 stops of IS means you can put f/8 and get a great pic handheld.

a lot of time wide-angle lenses are useful for architectural photography. photographing architecture is dim or low light (evening shots, cathedral shots, other interior spaces) is a very common occurrence. since none of Canon's current wide primes (nor the current or apparently future 24-70) have IS, this is a great addition.

as mkln noted, with architecture you really want more DOF, so being able to hold steady longer is a great feature.

Alfonso

guess it'll be great for video, as the only Canon wide lens with IS would be 24-105 f/4but not sure id sell my 28 1.8 for this, unless its THAT much sharper than the 1.8 @ 2.8any ideas on price range? same goes for the 28mm

mkln

Most of the cheaper lenses have IS. Probably because the Marketing Machine has led a lot of consumer to believe that lenses with IS are better than lenses without IS.

hmm let me think about this...

yeah they're better.

( can make taking pics easier in lots of situations = better )

I'll also take IS over f/2. Not a big deal on a 24mm lens. then even less of a big deal for a non-L lens.would you prefer a 24 f/2 non-IS non-L with probably harsh bokeh so that when (when!) you get OOF areas, they're also ugly? thanks but no thanks.

this is just about right. leave the f/2 for L glass. give the poor, marketing-indoctrinated consumers the 2.8 IS's.we finally get cheap glass for FF. just great. finally!

Right! Since Canon and Nikon refuse to implement in-camera IS, and tout the "vastly superior" in-lens version, you really have to cry foul when they leave it out of any lens design, save maybe the widest of angles.

For composition purposes is it vastly superior.

And at 24mm and 28mm there is no reason for IS at all. I have no problem at all buying a non-IS lens that is below 100mm. Now I suppose I'll hear from the video people about that.